About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN2 4
CNNW 3
CSPAN 3
CNN 2
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 14
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
are not willing to enter into an agreement for consideration of the hagel nomination. therefore, i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 10. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of defense, charles timothy hagel of nebraska to be secretary of defense. the presiding officer: without objection, the motion to proceed is agreed to. mr. reid: mr. president, i send a cloture motion to the desk anded ask the clerk -- and ask the clerk to report. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we the undersigned senators in accordance with the rules of 22 of the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring to a close debate on nomination of charles timothy hagel of nebraska to be secretary of defense, signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from -- the majority leader is recognized. without objection, the reading of the names is dispensed with. mr. reid: this is the first time in the history of our country that a presidential nominee
voted on defense secretary nomination of chuck hagel by approving the nomination in a partyline vote. 14 democrats and 11 republicans. before the vote, senators discuss the nominee and the reason for opposing or supporting his nomination. it begins with committee chairman karl levin. >> the committee meets today to consider the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to serve as the next secretary of defense. he -- we received the nomination through which the. we held a hearing 12 days ago. senator hagel has provided the personal and financial information required by the committee. he has received letters from the director of the office of government ethics, and the acting defense department general counsel. certifying that he meets the ethics and conflict of interest standards. he has responded to our advanced policy questions and/or and the questions for the record, for these reasons i believe the time has come for the committee to act on this nomination. senator hagel has received broad support from a wide array of senior statesman in defense foreign policy organizations. at our janu
on television. today in a 58-40 cloture voted. they blocked chuck hagel being the sex -- secretary of defense. next the hour long debate on the nomination. they said they will not vote for cloture today, i think it's too bad. there's been more than enough time to read the additional speeches that have been coming in. the argument raced beyond that i know has do with the payment an equity fund that was received has been fully explained. as a highly reputable fund that senator hagel was an adviser to like many other reputable people. i think the continuation what amounts to filibuster is too bad when there's a secretary of defense who is leafing to go back to california. we need to have our new secretary of defense in place given the circumstances in this world. we have a budget crisis in this country, our scwesser is confronting us. that's sequester will have a damaging effect on the deference department, on the men and women in uniform. and on the programs, the equipment, the training that they need to be ready for any kind of contingency. so the delay in having a vote on cloture, to me is a
@wolfblitzer, @katebaldu an. >>> up next, senators rough up chuck hagel during his confirmation hearing. a senior lawmaker is "outfront" to explain why he's voting against chuck hagel. and chuck grassley implies the video games, not guns, are the reasons for america's mass shootings. what role did the donations he received from the nra play? and another super bowl ad being called racist. we'll show you the ad. it's a near and dear to our heart topic. let's go "outfront." >>> and we begin right now, though, with breaking news. you are looking at pictures right now of mexico city. this is a live shot that you're watching from our affiliate, forotv. right now, they're reporting that five people are dead and at least 75 are injured. there was an explosion at the offices of mexico's state-run pemex oil company. there are at least 30 people still trapped in the building. it's up clear right now what caused that explosion. we are trying to figure that out for you. we will monitor that, and as we get more information, we'll bring it to you throughout the hour. and a good evening to all of you t
chuck hagel's nomination. let's listen to senator reid reacting to the republicans holding up hagel's nomination. >> but it's shocking that my republican colleagues would leave the nation without a fully empowered secretary of defense. for the sake of our national security, it's time to put aside this political theater. and that's what it is. it's tragic that they've decided to filibuster this qualified nominee. it is really unfortunate. >> can you give us the status of this whole thing and explain where we are in the process? >> as we know, the republicans did not allow a vote to happen. they invoke cloture which means it's on hold. what's happened now is the congress on a break for a week, chuck hagel's got to wait around. and there's a concern, i think, at the white house and other areas that something could come up. that's what people are looking for. the white house is expressing confidence. president obama said he's confident this will happen. and other administration officials have put the word out that they are confident. but whether it happens or not after congress gets bac
. >>> i'm going to go chuck hagel when i finish here and say i'm sorry, sorry this has happened. i'm sorry for the president. i'm sorry for the country and i'm sorry for you, but we're not going to give up on you. >> democrats vowing to stand by their man, even as republicans delivered a sharp rebuke to fellow republican chuck hagel this week in his bid to become defense secretary. joining me now is republican senator john barrasso from wyoming. senator, thanks for being here. >> thank you, candy. >> something caught our eye that senator mccain said in explaining the republican -- part of the republican resistance to hagel in which he says it goes back to there's a lot of ill will towards senator hagel because when he was a republican, he attacked president bush mercilessly, at one point said he was the worst president since herbert hoover and said that the surge was the worst blunder since the vietnam war which is nonsense and was very anti his own party and people. people don't forget that. is this a revenge vote? mean, this seems -- i understand that people, a lot of republicans who per
confirmation hearing of take hegel. here is a look. -- chuck hagel. here is a look. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm pleased to see an old friend and senator warner and the members of this committee who have contributed so much to our nation's defense. senator hagel, members of this committee will raise questions reflecting concerns with your policy positions. our concerns pertain to the quality of your professional judgment and your worldview on critical areas of national security, including security in the middle east. with that in mind, let me begin with your opposition to the surge in iraq. 2006 republicans lost the election and we began the surge and you wrote a piece in "the washington post." in 2007, you said it does not in the national interest to have military involvement. there was an exchange with secretary rice and the foreign relations committee after some nonsense about syria crossing the border into iran because of the surge. there is a reference to cambodia in 1970. you said "when he said he motioned, the kind of policies the president is talking about is very dangerous. as a ma
the qualifications of chuck hagel. i served with chuck hagel. he is a conservative republican representing the ultra liberal state of nebraska. he served with distinction in the united states senate as a senator, served on the foreign relations committee, armed services committee, intelligence committee. he's a man of quality, a man of courage. not just being able to come and give a speech here on the senate floor. during the vietnam war, he volunteered to go into combat. that's what he chose to do. because he thought it was the patriotic thing to do for his country, our country. and his family felt that way. he and his brother went togeth together. they didn't go to push pencils. they carried rifles, had strapped to their sides grenad grenades. he was wounded twice. he's an enlisted man. he didn't walk around ordering people to do things. people were ordering him around what to do. except when it came to his brother, who he saved his brother's life in combat in vietnam. and they are filibustering him. that's what they're doing. i'm going to go call chuck hagel when i finish here and say, i'm sorry,
was the president, pretty much. she was constantly on the road. i want to say something about the hagel confirmation -- guesthost: which we will talk about at 8:30, just so you know. caller: people have got to understand -- host: if you want to join us at 8:30 to talk about the hagel confirmation, you are more than welcome to do that. "washington post" -- "iran to in which more uranium." "it is believed to be vastly superior to the clunky 1970's- era ir1 machine that iraq releases, giving iran the ability to produce up to four times as much enriched uranium per machine. iran claims the enriched uranium would it be used exclusively for nuclear power plants, but officials suspect that iran is using nuclear energy for weapons programs." this from "the post," the headline is specifically looking at china. "chinese companies invested $6.5 billion in the united states last year. that's a record, and a 17% increase over the prior year. but that's also about the same amount invested in the united states by spain." secretary of state hillary clinton and her performance over the last four years. giving you an
for chuck hagel on defense secretary. federal employees only, dividing the lines geographically. here are the numbers -- we want to hear from federal employees only in and outside of washington d.c., your take on sequester. also send us a tweet, twitter.com @cspanwj. this morning, here is the "new york post with the breakdown of what this administration is warning on sequester and the impact on federal employees. scare tactics, being $85 billion in sequester cuts would be bought by consumers, home buyers, and even some taxpayers filing paper returns. -- there is a breakdown of the federal employees that are impacted inside of washington and outside across the country. we want to hear from them only this morning to get their take on sequestration. let's go to sandra in georgia, what do you do? caller: good morning. i work for the department of defense. this is huge for me. specifically i work in the office of soldiers council. we represent soldiers that the army is looking to put out of the military. this is a monumental for me. i am proud of federal worker. we worked extremely hard. m
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)